COMPENSATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 584, 12 August 1909, Page 6

COMPENSATION COURT.

LAND TAKEN AT EVANS BAY. COMMENT ON A BYGONE BOOM. A claim for land taken at Evans Bay, Miramar, for Harbour Board reclamation purposes was heard in the Compensation Court yesterday. His Honour Mr. Justico Sim presided, and the assessors were: Mr. Alexander Lorimer Wilson, for tho claimant, Mr. Josias Alexander Chancellor M'Eldowney, warehouseman, of 12 Da,vis Street, Wellington, and Mr. James Lockie ' for the respondent corporation, tho Wellington Harbour Board. . ■ . Mr. C. P. Skerrett,' K.C., with him .Mr H. Buddie, appeared for the claimant, and Mr. TVS. Weston for the Harbour Board.

Tho claim -was for £1500 as compensation for loss arising out. of tho taking 'of lot 42, block 1, part of section 9, Watts Peninsula District. The claim was made up as follows:—2 roods 16.5 perches of land taken, £1350; building and fencing erected thereon, £150; total, £1500. Claimant refused to ao-. oept an offer of £775 made by the Harbour Board. '

Mr, Skerrett said that the 1 Harbour Board, acting under the Governor's proclamation dated November 6, 1908, had taken land in tlie borough of Miramar for the puroose of reclaiming a portion of Evans Bay. The section for which compensation was now claimcd was part of a ridge running along the western- side of Evans Bay. It was about 140 feet above sea level, and had a steep face. Aooess was-good, and the ..land was suitable for residential sites. It possessed a magnificent view. . Claimant purchased his section in 1902, spent £130 on the erection of a lean-to, and £35 in fencing. Claimant's valuations ranged from £950 to £1000, including the value of the buildings and fencing. The offer of £775 had not been made by fho Harbour Board'until after the commencement of proceedings. Claimant' would support his valuation by quoting the prices realised at sales in the vicinity. - This' site had been purchased for a home and' not for speculative purpose's;' claimajit had , now bought another section in the vicinity, on which .he intended to build his house. Under these circumstances the Harbour Board could very well pay a fair and liberal -price for tho land. ,

A number of land and estate agents were called to give evidence as to the values of land at' Mi-ramar. In tho course of this evidence it was stated that land was booming in tho Miramar borough a few' years ago, and a slump, commenced about March, 1908. Since that time the land had been "dead," and sales had been rare.'A number of syndicates had been formed to cut up the land of the district, and in connection with one of these fifteen sections hod been sold put of about 250.. There had boon no sales of land at £5 per foot' during the past twelve months. At the present time there . were about ISO or 200 honses on Miramar flat. - Mr. Weston, in stating the-respondent's case, said that the Harbour Board first considered the taking of' tlipse lands in November or December, 1907. Inquiries were made as to the prices in January, 1908, and' the figures ouoted were found to be prohibitive. In March, tho board dealt with a largo number of owners. Before any land ,was taken, valuations were made by leading valuers: Mr. D. Martin, Government Valuer: Mr. W. H. Turnbull, of the firm of W; H. Turnbull and '.Co.Mr. A. Gelattley, of Betliune and Co.; and Mr. James Arties, City Valuer. The board, in making the offer of £775, whs offering the amount'.of the highest valuation mado by any of . the valuers, who had been asked to value on a liberal 'basis. About £125 had been'allowed for the buildings oh the land. Thcsb valuations had been made in March, 1903. Claimant-had not come, to, terms as the other owners had, and his land was taken compulsorily in November, 190 S. The Court had to find tlie value of the'land in November, 1908. Claimant had a, small array oimen of standing to support his case, and they admitted that a slump at present existed. " -- ' 1

His Honour: .Do you suggest that the slump is permanent? . Mr.. Weston: I do, your Honour, and I say that the outrageous prices which were being paid, and-which made ,us' a' laughinp-stcck throughout New Zealand, will not be paid in future. It is well known, that once a land boom' bursts, it is a long time before property returns to its former value. . Evidence. of, the valuers and,'of the Harbour Board engineer, and other .officials , was tendered to support the case for the respondent corporation. n. . , Thomas Mason Wilford, chairman of the. Harbour Board, said that M'Eldowney ! s land, was not required for reclamation purposes. The board, lie oontinued, had'no intention to go on with any more reclamation than that for which the contract had been let last week. The board was prepared to pay M'Eldowney £775 for his section, and lot him have the spoil, provided he agreed to remove it within two years. ' Mr. .Skerrett: Do you : know then that tho land has been taken improperly under the BtatuteP Witness 1 : No, I do - not. 'Unquestionably ive have now taken more land than will be ased for reclamation purposes. ' Mr. Skerrett: Was the land taken for the purpose of carrying out reclamation? - Witness: In the first, instance, yes. ■ A scheme involving art expenditure of £148,000 in reclamation ,was first, proposed, but a schomo has now been substituted 'for tho expenditure of £51,000 in reclamation, • with £15,000 taken off for a wharf , road and concrete wall. Tho; reclamation to bo dono is very small indeed. ■ Mr. Skerrett: The land was originally taken for the purpose of carrying out reclamation? ; Witness: Tho schcmo was originally a very lnrgo one, but it has been cut down to nothing by tlio now board. ■■ Mr. Skerrott: A lot of land lias been purchased by tho board which is quite useless ? Witness: I will not.say that.- ' -The'land would bo useful if reclamation were to bo done hereafter,' but this board has no intention of doing it. • Counsel addressed the. Court, and his Honour . intimated that an inspection would bo mado of tho site. Tho Court adjourned until this- morning.